"“This is the president of the United States’ signature domestic policy,” Vittert interrupted. “That and probably repeal and replace of Obamacare that he campaigned on. It’s been two years, are you telling me in two years, DHS and the White House couldn’t come up with this plan and say, ‘Here’s the plan for the wall. Now go enact it, Congress.'”

“I don’t think for the Trump administration it’s really about those kinds of specifics,” Mark conceded. “It’s about telling his political base they are working on a wall, whether it’s metaphorical — parts of the U.S.-Mexico border literally could not have a wall because it’s along the Rio Grande.”"

Basically the administration is asking for money and they have no clue how much it will really cost, or what it will really look like. Why do we have a shutdown over this, and why are the GOP members in the house so willing to go along with Trump on this?

You’re about to go off topic which is why the first one was locked. Please don’t discuss what the shutdown is actually about.

We have to. That is part of the shut down. The only thing individual #1 wants and Republicans support is a wall. Nothing else. No drones, no boots on the ground, no checking on expired visas. Just a wall.

The whole shutdown is over "Build the wall" However there are no plans and no costs associated with this wall. Republicans should be calling out the Administration for failing to properly run the government and for properly defining the resources and effort to "Build the wall". The GOP is the party that always wants "accountability", but there is no call for it here, and there are resources being denied to the American Citizens and Federal employees by this veto threat of Trump.

At then end of the day this shutdown is much like the story of the Emperor's new clothes. Wasteful spending for nothing.

You’re about to go off topic which is why the first one was locked. Please don’t discuss what the shutdown is actually about.

Thanks and just a remark, that was exactly the reason why the thread was locked, in the initial post of the previous thread it was nowhere mentioned that it was the intention to discuss the reason for the shutdown, but the (longer-term) effects of the shutdown. So for this thread there is the same understanding. Feel free to open an new thread to discuss the wall resp. Trump's decision to shutdown the Government to get the wall. Otherwise thread title can be changed, but please do not post such a request here, use the reporting function instead or write to [email protected].

You’re about to go off topic which is why the first one was locked. Please don’t discuss what the shutdown is actually about.

Thanks and just a remark, that was exactly the reason why the thread was locked, in the initial post of the previous thread it was nowhere mentioned that it was the intention to discuss the reason for the shutdown, but the (longer-term) effects of the shutdown. So for this thread there is the same understanding. Feel free to open an new thread to discuss the wall resp. Trump's decision to shutdown the Government to get the wall. Otherwise thread title can be changed, but please do not post such a request here, use the reporting function instead or write to [email protected].

Are we going to have multiple threads on why how and when ? It seems more efficient that when discussing a shutdown , the reasons, effects, and details of the ongoing issue should all be included in one thread.

You’re about to go off topic which is why the first one was locked. Please don’t discuss what the shutdown is actually about.

Thanks and just a remark, that was exactly the reason why the thread was locked, in the initial post of the previous thread it was nowhere mentioned that it was the intention to discuss the reason for the shutdown, but the (longer-term) effects of the shutdown. So for this thread there is the same understanding. Feel free to open an new thread to discuss the wall resp. Trump's decision to shutdown the Government to get the wall. Otherwise thread title can be changed, but please do not post such a request here, use the reporting function instead or write to [email protected].

Are we going to have multiple threads on why how and when ? It seems more efficient that when discussing a shutdown , the reasons, effects, and details of the ongoing issue should all be included in one thread.

Why isn't there a piece of legislation which says: if there is no new budget bill has passed, the old one will be extended till the new one has passed. Seems like normal practice to me and the government can continue as if. This seems so ridiculous. Because politicians can't agree, civil servants are out of a paycheck.

Why isn't there a piece of legislation which says: if there is no new budget bill has passed, the old one will be extended till the new one has passed. Seems like normal practice to me and the government can continue as if. This seems so ridiculous. Because politicians can't agree, civil servants are out of a paycheck.

Because at any one time there is always one faction that has the upper hand, and that faction won't want to give up the option of throwing a monkey wrench into the works if they don't get their way.

The Smithsonian Museums and the National Zoo in DC (and branches in other cities) are not expected to be open today. That will hurt the tourism industry there.

All but a few National Park areas are closed, those open are getting subsidies from State governments (like the Statue of Liberty). Many with partial openings with local volunteers or actually closed are seeing serious problems of no trash collection, no maintenance of toilet facilities or closed, people going with ATV's, motorcycles to unauthorized areas causing serious short and long term environmental damage. Related departments like Forestry are not doing work to determine possible fire risks or patrolled to keep out illegal logging or use of ATV's and like vehicle, causing short and long term environmental damage. There is also the loss of tourism revenues in and around those parks.

One of the biggest ironies as to the wall funding dispute and shutdown over it is that staff at the Dept. of Homeland Security are not at work or not being paid. That includes ICE, the Coast Guard, people who look out for terrorism and illegal immigration. People who person airport security checkpoints may not have enough money for gas or transit fares to get to/from their jobs as many live paycheck to paycheck and that may affect their quality of work to keep out terrorists and terror devices.

Further irony, the President's Secret Service staff isn't getting paid either. That isn't a good idea.

Soon the Justice Dept. won't have any funds so courts for civil and all but the most important criminal matters will be suspended, Justice Dept. investigations will be suspended (but not including Mueller's as separately and fully funded). Immigration courts will be shut down, causing making the massive backlogs even worse.

The SEC, EPA and other regulatory agencies are shut down so certain time and money sensitive financial deals may not happen, some will take advantage of the lack of enforcement to get away with a lot of stuff they shouldn't, cleanups are suspended. .

The IRS is pretty much shut down, so less revenues being taken in or processed, no audits, no way early filers can do so that may desperately need refunds. If this shutdown lasts much longer, the time to file tax returns by all will have to be extended by 2 weeks or a month.

Of course, for all workers, it may mean real hardship, financial damage and affecting retailers and other businesses revenues.

All this over a measly $5 Billion dollars and egos.

Last edited by ltbewr on Wed Jan 02, 2019 6:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Are we going to have multiple threads on why how and when ? It seems more efficient that when discussing a shutdown , the reasons, effects, and details of the ongoing issue should all be included in one thread.

That’s the point I was trying to make. I personally don’t like the idea of a wall and think a win/win would be if Trump could say a high tech virtual wall (with sensors). Technology has proven to be great at spying on us so that could work. The only reason I would prefer an actual wall is if future administratons won’t enforce border laws which we have seen in the past. The Democrats best shot at winning is importing more Democrats which is the main reason they are against the wall.

Last edited by afcjets on Wed Jan 02, 2019 6:35 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Great, that’s the point i was trying to make. I personally don’t like the idea of a wall and think a win/win if Trump could say a high tech virtual wall (with sensors) Technology has proven to be great at spying on us so that could work. The only reason I would prefer an actual wall is if future administratons don’t enforce border laws which we have seen in the past. The Democrats best shot at winning is importing more Democrats which is why they are against a wall.[/quote]

Physical walls have to be maintained, and this wall is not for access between the public domain and a private domain, it is between two neighboring countries. A physical wall that needs to be maintained from one side is not effective, and it does not answer the issues inherent in the immigration issue. Namely, what happens when they are already here.

Trump is so good at tweeting about people already past the border committing crimes, but how does a wall stop someone from flying in, tunneling in ,or accessing through other means?

The money for a "wall" would be better spent on enforcement of labor laws and crackdowns on those that are employing people willfully with falsified records.

The Democrats best shot at winning is importing more Democrats which is the main reason they are against the wall.

But then why would Obama have deported more illegal immigrants than any other president in history? This opinion you hear on Fox News and then repeat on a daily basis makes you come off as a complete imbecile. Let me ask you a question..remember that girl in Iowa that got killed last year and her governor and both Senators and state legislature and her President and House of Representatives and Senate and the SCOTUS were all in Republican hands? Is that dairy farm still in business that hired that illegal alien murderer? Do you ever ask yourself why that is?

In my opinion it's Republicans that love open borders. The vast majority of states are 100% Republican and they are all filled to the brim with businesses hiring illegal Mexicans and Hondurans and you guys don't do shit about it except to say that Democrats want open borders to increase the numbers of voting Democrats. It's Republicans that refuse to enforce current laws. You should be throwing all these Republicans small business owners in prison, all the farmers..why don't you? That Iowa farm should be out of business and the whole family should be doing 20 to life in Joliet. But I best they're still in business and farming away while you flap your gums on A.net. I can't wait to hear your bullshit Fox News talking points on that one.

I am not a Republican and I agree employers who hire them should be responsible. Of course Obama deported more because there are more of them under him as he was the most recent two term president, however he did not enforce all border laws and is for catch and release, anchor babies, path to citizenship, etc.

I am not a Republican and I agree employers who hire them should be responsible. Of course Obama deported more because there are more of them under him as he was the most recent two term president, however he did not enforce all border laws and is for catch and release, anchor babies, path to citizenship, etc.

The number of Illegal immigrants in this country peaked during GWB at 12.2 million, from 8.5 million at the start of his term. By the time Obama left office it was 10.7 million.

Why isn't there a piece of legislation which says: if there is no new budget bill has passed, the old one will be extended till the new one has passed. Seems like normal practice to me and the government can continue as if. This seems so ridiculous. Because politicians can't agree, civil servants are out of a paycheck.

Because the Constitution says that won’t happen in Article 1 Section 9

Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.

The Congress needs to pass an appropriations bill for the government to spend money.

Why isn't there a piece of legislation which says: if there is no new budget bill has passed, the old one will be extended till the new one has passed. Seems like normal practice to me and the government can continue as if. This seems so ridiculous. Because politicians can't agree, civil servants are out of a paycheck.

Because the Constitution says that won’t happen in Article 1 Section 9

Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.

The Congress needs to pass an appropriations bill for the government to spend money.

I am not a Republican and I agree employers who hire them should be responsible. Of course Obama deported more because there are more of them under him as he was the most recent two term president, however he did not enforce all border laws and is for catch and release, anchor babies, path to citizenship, etc.

The number of Illegal immigrants in this country peaked during GWB at 12.2 million, from 8.5 million at the start of his term. By the time Obama left office it was 10.7 million.

Look at the graph and compare Bush’s 8 year term (2001-2008) to Obama’s (2009-2016). While a couple of years early in Bush’s term data is missing, it is easy to see the trend. The total volume of blue is greater during Obama’s term than Bush’s even when you fill in the missing dat the trend suggests.

Last edited by afcjets on Wed Jan 02, 2019 7:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I am not a Republican and I agree employers who hire them should be responsible. Of course Obama deported more because there are more of them under him as he was the most recent two term president, however he did not enforce all border laws and is for catch and release, anchor babies, path to citizenship, etc.

The number of Illegal immigrants in this country peaked during GWB at 12.2 million, from 8.5 million at the start of his term. By the time Obama left office it was 10.7 million.

Look at the graph and compare Bush’s 8 year term (2001-2008) to Obama’s (2009-2016). While a couple of years early in Bush’s term data is missing, it is easy to see the trend. The total volume of blue is greater during Obama’s term than Bush’s even when you fill in the missing dat the trend suggests.

I suspect that we have a president who will threaten government shutdown on many issues if he gets his way on this one. And of course the House of Representatives is constitutionally privileged when it comes to setting federal spending.

Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)

think a win/win would be if Trump could say a high tech virtual wall (with sensors). Technology has proven to be great at spying on us so that could work..

The "virtual fence"idea was attempted before as part of the Secure Fence Act of 2006. We had two pilot programs here in Arizona and Boeing was granted the contract for the project. The project was a disaster so to speak, with costly overrun along with project delays, so the project was never completed or was able to operate properly. Boeing still got their money even though the virtual fence didn't work.

The Obama administration will halt new work on a "virtual fence" on the U.S.-Mexican border, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano announced Tuesday, diverting $50 million in planned economic stimulus funds for the project to other purposes.

Napolitano said the freeze on work beyond two pilot projects in Arizona was pending a broader reassessment. But the move signals a likely death knell for a troubled five-year plan to drape a chain of tower-mounted sensors and other surveillance gear across most of the 2,000-mile southern border.

That vision, initiated in 2006 by President George W. Bush, called for a series of networked cameras, radar and communications gear to help speed the response of U.S. Border Patrol officers to catch illegal immigrants and smugglers over the vast border area. However, the effort has been plagued by technical problems and delays with prime contractor Boeing Corp.

What happened to National E-Verify ? I heard it mentioned today on the news along with sanctions against employers who hire illegals. The first time in months. We had it for the state government here in RI. and it was discontinued by Governor Gump (Chaffee) NO one has touched it since.

What happened to National E-Verify ? I heard it mentioned today on the news along with sanctions against employers who hire illegals. The first time in months. We had it for the state government here in RI. and it was discontinued by Governor Gump (Chaffee) NO one has touched it since.

E-Verify is not operational thanks to the shutdown.

They can't even verify the new aids for the newly elected officials in DC.

Why isn't there a piece of legislation which says: if there is no new budget bill has passed, the old one will be extended till the new one has passed. Seems like normal practice to me and the government can continue as if. This seems so ridiculous. Because politicians can't agree, civil servants are out of a paycheck.

Basically the tool exists and is used extremely frequently, it's called a continuing resolution. However that still needs to pass a vote, it isn't automatic.

Which makes sense when considering the US has had huge deficits for years, it shouldn't be possible to continue like that without politicians at least taking responsibility for it.

New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams

What happened to National E-Verify ? I heard it mentioned today on the news along with sanctions against employers who hire illegals. The first time in months. We had it for the state government here in RI. and it was discontinued by Governor Gump (Chaffee) NO one has touched it since.

E-Verify is not operational thanks to the shutdown.

They can't even verify the new aids for the newly elected officials in DC.

Look at the graph and compare Bush’s 8 year term (2001-2008) to Obama’s (2009-2016). While a couple of years early in Bush’s term data is missing, it is easy to see the trend. The total volume of blue is greater during Obama’s term than Bush’s even when you fill in the missing dat the trend suggests.

I am looking at that. The total volume of blue in the graph (the number of illegal immigrants each year) appears to be somewhat greater from 2009-2016 than 2001-2008 when you fill in the missing data during Bush’s early years according to the trend.

think a win/win would be if Trump could say a high tech virtual wall (with sensors). Technology has proven to be great at spying on us so that could work..

The "virtual fence"idea was attempted before as part of the Secure Fence Act of 2006. We had two pilot programs here in Arizona and Boeing was granted the contract for the project. The project was a disaster so to speak, with costly overrun along with project delays, so the project was never completed or was able to operate properly. Boeing still got their money even though the virtual fence didn't work.

The Obama administration will halt new work on a "virtual fence" on the U.S.-Mexican border, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano announced Tuesday, diverting $50 million in planned economic stimulus funds for the project to other purposes.

Napolitano said the freeze on work beyond two pilot projects in Arizona was pending a broader reassessment. But the move signals a likely death knell for a troubled five-year plan to drape a chain of tower-mounted sensors and other surveillance gear across most of the 2,000-mile southern border.

That vision, initiated in 2006 by President George W. Bush, called for a series of networked cameras, radar and communications gear to help speed the response of U.S. Border Patrol officers to catch illegal immigrants and smugglers over the vast border area. However, the effort has been plagued by technical problems and delays with prime contractor Boeing Corp.

Thanks for the info, i wasn’t aware of that. Still, you would think at the rate technology is improving, 12 years later something similar could work.

Look at the graph and compare Bush’s 8 year term (2001-2008) to Obama’s (2009-2016). While a couple of years early in Bush’s term data is missing, it is easy to see the trend. The total volume of blue is greater during Obama’s term than Bush’s even when you fill in the missing dat the trend suggests.

A couple of interesting points from the USA Today article (mostly for afcjets):

The majority of undocumented immigrants who arrived in the past five years are “likely” visa overstays – foreigners who enter the country legally with a visa, then stay after the visa expires

and

The number of undocumented immigrants working in the USA (7.8 million) and their share of the U.S. workforce (4.8 percent) fell steadily since their high points in 2007.

A simple wall will not "fix" anything. We need people out following up on those who have overstayed their visas also known as ILLEGALS. We do need southern border security but a simple wall will do nothing except make the MAGA fan boys a.k.a. The Republican Party be all smug and nothing else.

What's the shutdown about? It's about a president flailing to stir up his base to distract them from the fact that his administration is in a nosedive and about to hit the ground, at this point. I'm a little surprised anyone is still sticking their neck out to defend him. God knows how long this will last, narcissists get really erratic when the walls close in on them.

Why isn't there a piece of legislation which says: if there is no new budget bill has passed, the old one will be extended till the new one has passed. Seems like normal practice to me and the government can continue as if. This seems so ridiculous. Because politicians can't agree, civil servants are out of a paycheck.

Because at any one time there is always one faction that has the upper hand, and that faction won't want to give up the option of throwing a monkey wrench into the works if they don't get their way.

too many lawyers and not enough mathematicians in politics.....

afcjets wrote:

You’re about to go off topic which is why the first one was locked. Please don’t discuss what the shutdown is actually about.

well, i wasn´t part of the first threat and had no idea there where limits on what can be discussed and that directive wasn´t repeated by the OP as the mod pointed out. But i guess the topic has been broadened.

Thing is, if Trump really holds out to get his wall slash-fund, after all since there is no plan that money would be basically 5 Billion to be spend at the presidents digression, so it isn´t even really a budget point, this shutdown will be long and effects will start to compound.

Something i don´t get how that legally even works. If my employer doesn´t pay me a court will rather quickly tell my boss to better pay me and i could ultimately force my employer into bankruptcy proceedings, and my boss would have a fairly decent chance of going to prison, or at least be banned from being a CEO again for a couple of year/life, for the delayed filing of insolvency....... And no matter how pissed i am, no matter how quick i move, my health insurance would strip my boss naked before i hung up the phone to ask if my boss paid my premiums......

Now for civil servants for life, while they are in a different legal position, they get prepaid here specifically to make sure they don´t need to look for alternative income (=bribes)..... So why aren´t people just getting a enforcement order "Pay up!" against the federal government...... ?

Sure it will. It just won’t fix everything. It is, however, part of an overall solution to the problem - a problem that Democrats give lip service to taking seriously.

A wall, without an actual proposal able to carry weight regarding cost, time, cost/effectiveness assessment does solve nothing, as there is no reason to believe a wall gives you more security per $ than other options.

Since a borderwall hasn't been constructed yet it is clearly apparent that a wall was not considered cost effective in the past, so quite obviously using funds for a wall reduces border security. It would appear Trump wants the border to be less safe.

A border wall will do less than nothing, and since the current "administration" does not have a plan or assessment you have no way of showing that a wall won't have a negative effect.

Sure it will. It just won’t fix everything. It is, however, part of an overall solution to the problem - a problem that Democrats give lip service to taking seriously.

A wall, without an actual proposal able to carry weight regarding cost, time, cost/effectiveness assessment does solve nothing, as there is no reason to believe a wall gives you more security per $ than other options.

Since a borderwall hasn't been constructed yet it is clearly apparent that a wall was not considered cost effective in the past, so quite obviously using funds for a wall reduces border security. It would appear Trump wants the border to be less safe.

A border wall will do less than nothing, and since the current "administration" does not have a plan or assessment you have no way of showing that a wall won't have a negative effect.

Best regardsThomas

It’s hard to take this seriously when the Democrats’ plan for enhancing border security is lip service and nothing more.

In the meantime I’m going to watch Elizabeth Warren be completely natural while enjoying a beer on Instagram.

It’s hard to take this seriously when the Democrats’ plan for enhancing border security is lip service and nothing more. .

a temper tantrum Trump style without any plan, numbers or assessments whatsoever is pretty much the definition of lip service. It is the opposite of sincere to demand ~20$ from every american without even telling them what he plans to do with that.

What's the shutdown about? It's about a president flailing to stir up his base to distract them from the fact that his administration is in a nosedive and about to hit the ground, at this point. I'm a little surprised anyone is still sticking their neck out to defend him. God knows how long this will last, narcissists get really erratic when the walls close in on them.

I think it is a struggle for power.

In a nutshell, there is an establishment vs anti-establishment cold civil war going on right now. The Establishment wants the government open & fully funded, and businesses fully supplied within unlimited low cost labor, never mind where they come from. But the Establishment lost the presidency, so naturally there is a gigantic power instability. The Establishment is more powerful than the presidency over time, but the presidency has a considerable amount of power too, definitely enough to cause them some bowel distress.

I think the really high priced boutique gastroenterologists are probably very busy these past 2 years. They probably had to call for assistance from France. Just my initial take on things.

The shutdown is about two factors:1. A President who drew a hard line on what he wanted out of the budget.2. The Democrats in the Legislature replying by drawing their own hard line.

Under normal times (whenever that was - I think that was a myth), politicians draw softer lines for what they want to see and then negotiate a compromise where most people can reasonably accept most of what was in it. That process will hopefully work out in this case. My sister is having the pleasure of working for free lately due to the shutdown.

America's Constitution is generally written as a "rule of the consensus." It is not rule of the majority, since the original drafters were fearful of a tyranny of the majority (for good reason, as history has shown in other democracies). Even when a single party holds the Presidency and simple majorities in the House and Senate, you still see difficulty in pushing through a rapid agenda. The system was carefully engineering to pass only what the general consensus would find acceptable and to make a single-party super-majority almost impossible to achieve and impossible to maintain.

So in the end...they're going to have to hammer out something generally agreeable to everyone. I hope that occurs very soon.

Look at the graph and compare Bush’s 8 year term (2001-2008) to Obama’s (2009-2016). While a couple of years early in Bush’s term data is missing, it is easy to see the trend. The total volume of blue is greater during Obama’s term than Bush’s even when you fill in the missing dat the trend suggests.

I am looking at that. The total volume of blue in the graph (the number of illegal immigrants each year) appears to be somewhat greater from 2009-2016 than 2001-2008 when you fill in the missing data during Bush’s early years according to the trend.

The total number of illegal immigrants present increased the most under Bush, There is no volume to fill in. The number of illegals decreased over Obama's term.

I am looking at that. The total volume of blue in the graph (the number of illegal immigrants each year) appears to be somewhat greater from 2009-2016 than 2001-2008 when you fill in the missing data during Bush’s early years according to the trend.

The total number of illegal immigrants present increased the most under Bush, There is no volume to fill in. The number of illegals decreased over Obama's term.

As the article you linked mentions, the decrease in illegal immigrants was mainly due to the economy. Excluding the period right after 9/11, the economy was relatively strong for the first 7 to 7.5 years of Bush’s 8 year term whereas under Obama we had the slowest recovery in our nation’s history.

I am looking at that. The total volume of blue in the graph (the number of illegal immigrants each year) appears to be somewhat greater from 2009-2016 than 2001-2008 when you fill in the missing data during Bush’s early years according to the trend.

The total number of illegal immigrants present increased the most under Bush, There is no volume to fill in. The number of illegals decreased over Obama's term.

As the article you linked mentions, the decrease in illegal immigrants was mainly due to the economy. Excluding the period right after 9/11, the economy was relatively strong for the first 7 to 7.5 years of Bush’s 8 year term whereas under Obama we had the slowest recovery in our nation’s history.

How was it the slowest recovery in history? GDP Grew on an average of at least 2% a year under Obama. That included 2 GOP led shutdowns and the Fiscal Cliff.

It’s hard to take this seriously when the Democrats’ plan for enhancing border security is lip service and nothing more.

What I am constantly surprised at is the blindness of many Republican's regarding the fact that "the wall" as Trump describes it, is just lip service as well.

It is not a real thing, it does not have a plan, a firm design, the land needed for it has not been bought or "eminent domained" from the land owners in the most important sections. The court battles for taking the land from citizens alone will last a decade easy and probably more.

"The wall" is just lip service. It is lip service to "followers" and some unthinking supporters. $5B will not do much for it and it will cost many, many more billions (of US taxpayers money) long into the future. It will require both the electronic surveillance and physical patrols along with regular maintenance and upgrades.

In my mind I think it is a waste as it is currently framed. While physical barriers in key locations and regions are smart and needed, a "big beautiful wall" along the entire US border is a pipe dream, and wasted time and effort.

Tugg

I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. ShatnerProductivity isn’t about getting more things done, rather it’s about getting the right things done, while doing less. - M. Oshin

The Mexican economy, thanks in part to NAFTA, has improved to the point that Mexicans like living and working in Mexico. IIRC, currently the bulk of those coming over, or trying to, are from central America. The most effective way of stopping that is international pressure to improve the economies and governments of that part of America. Yes, Make America Great Again - all of it - including central and south America.

Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)

Every one of those is a Trash Opinion piece with no pointing to the real GDP over 8 years. The first one is from 2012 The washington post is behind a paywall so it can't be verified. The last one is a complete trash piece and ignores gdp and the 2 shutdowns and fiscal cliffs that the GOP led congress sent us to.

Something i don´t get how that legally even works. If my employer doesn´t pay me a court will rather quickly tell my boss to better pay me and i could ultimately force my employer into bankruptcy proceedings, and my boss would have a fairly decent chance of going to prison, or at least be banned from being a CEO again for a couple of year/life, for the delayed filing of insolvency....... And no matter how pissed i am, no matter how quick i move, my health insurance would strip my boss naked before i hung up the phone to ask if my boss paid my premiums......

Now for civil servants for life, while they are in a different legal position, they get prepaid here specifically to make sure they don´t need to look for alternative income (=bribes)..... So why aren´t people just getting a enforcement order "Pay up!" against the federal government...... ?

Two words—Sovereign Immunity, they can’t sue unless the government says they can.

Second, US civil servants are paid for the previous pay period, if they are furloughed or don’t show up for they get paid. As a CS supervisor, I spent years reviewing and signing time cards, then more hours with auditors reviewing my work. Every conversion from civil to military status was scrutinized to the minute. Errors resulted in pay paid being recovered by deduction and supervisor facing potential disciplinary action.

The employees here have been formally furloughed thru civil service action. They’re not working, so they’re not getting paid.

Every one of those is a Trash Opinion piece with no pointing to the real GDP over 8 years. The first one is from 2012 The washington post is behind a paywall so it can't be verified. The last one is a complete trash piece and ignores gdp and the 2 shutdowns and fiscal cliffs that the GOP led congress sent us to.

I didn’t encounter any paywall on the Washington Post article and it is clearly not an opinion piece, which is why the link shows the subcategory news and it is written by someone they identify as a reporter.